BANCROFT 
LIBRARY 

O 

THE  LIBRARY 

OF 

THE  UNIVERSITY 
OF  CALIFORNIA 


WAS  JOSEPH   SMITH    A  POLYGAMIST? 

BY  ELDER  HEMAN  O.  SMITH. 

Herald  Publishing  House,  Reorganized  Church  of  Jesus 
Christ  of  Latter  Day  Saints,  Lamoni,  Decatur  Co., 
Iowa. 

There  is  now  going  the  rounds  of  the  press  an 
account  of  a  celebration  held  at  Salt  Air,  near 
Salt  Lake  City,  Utah,  June  1,  1899,  in  honor  of 
the  ninety-eighth  birthday  of  Brigham  Young 
deceased. 

It  is  said  that  sis  of  his  surviving  plural  wives 
were  present  at  the  banquet.  Two  of  these; 
viz.,  Zina  D.  Huntington  Young,  and  Emily  D. 
Partridge  Young,  it  is  asserted,  were  once  the 
wives  of  Joseph  Smith,  and  subsequently  be- 
came the  wives  of  Young,  for  time  only,  to  be 
delivered  to  Joseph  Smith  in  eternity.  On  ac- 
count of  this  latter  claim  the  report  has  been 
sent  us  by  several  persons  with  the  request  that 
we  reply. 

First,  we  will  state  that  the  question  ^  as  to 
whether  Joseph  Smith  taught  or  was  in  the 
practice  of  polygamy  or  not,  is  not  a  material 
one  so  far  as  our  faith  is  concerned;  for  Jesus 
Christ,  and  not  Joseph  Smith,  is  the  author  of 
that  faith,  and  the  conduct  of  Joseph  Smith 
cannot  affect  it. 

Only  our  estimate  of  Joseph  Smith  as  a  man 
can  be  affected  by  his  conduct.  Believing  as 
we  do  that  Joseph  Smith  was  an  instrument  in 
God's  hands  in  restoring  the  ancient  gospel, 
we  prefer  to  believe  that  he  remained  faithful 
and  pursued  the  paths  of  honor  and  virtue  unto 
the  end  of  his  life.  The  representatives  of  the 
Reorganized  Church  have  therefore  and  do  now 
call  upon  those  who  affirm  that  he  was  a  polyga- 
mist  for  the  proof.  The  rules  of  evidence  do 


2        WAS  JOSEPH  SMITH  A  POLYGAMIST? 

not  require  anyone  to  affirm  a  negative,  hence 
we  do  not  affirm  that  he  was  not  guilty,  but 
call  upon  those  making  the  charge  to  establish 
their  affirmation;  but  we  claim  the  right  to  ex- 
amine the  testimony  offered.  This  we  consider 
legitimate  and  fair. 

Let^us  examine  the  evidence  upon  which  the 
claim  is  based  that  these  two  women  sustained 
that  relation  to  Joseph  Smith.  Each  claims 
to  this  effect,  and  upon  their  statements  the 
case  rests  so  far  as  we  know. 
^  We  will  take  the  case  of  Mrs.  Zina  D.  Hun- 
tington  Young,  as  given  in  their  own  publica- 
tions. In  "Representative  Women  of  Deseret," 
page  12,  the  following  statement  is  found: — 

Sr.  Zina  was  married  in  Nauvoo,  and  had  two 
sons;  but  this  not  proving-  a  happy  union,  she  sub- 
sequently separated  from  her  husband.  Joseph 
Smith  taught  her  the  principle  of  marriage  for 
eternity,  and  she  accepted  it  as  a  divine  revelation, 
and  was  sealed  to  the  Prophet  for  time  and  all 
eternity,  after  the  order  of  the  new  and  everlasting 
covenant. 

Neither  the  date  of  her  marriage  to  Mr. 
Jacobs  nor  that  of  her  sealing  to  Joseph  Smith 
is  given  in  this  extract;  but  fortunately  we 
have  the  required  data  at  hand.  In  the  Record 
of  Marriages  in  Hancock  County,  Illinois,  Book 
A,  page  40,  is  the  record  of  the  marriage  of 
Henry  B.  Jacobs  and  ZinaD.  Huntington,  March 
7,  1841,  by  John  C.  Bennett,  Mayor  of  Nauvoo. 

A  careful  search  of  the  records  discloses  no 
divorce  of  these  parties. 

In  the  "Historical  Record,"  published  by 
Andrew  Jenson,  of  the  Utah  Church,  volume  6, 
page  233,  is  found  the  following: — 

Zina  D.  Huntington,  afterwards  the  wife  of 
Pres.  Brigham  Young,  sealed  to  the  Prophet  Oct. 
27,  1841,  Dimick  B.  Huntington  officiating. 


IOZSZ7 

WAS  JOSEPH  SMITH  A  POLYGAMIST  t        8 

According  to  these  statements,  taken  from  j 
official  records,  and  the  publications  of  the  Utah 
people  themselves,  it  was  just  seven  months  and 
twenty  days  after  her  marriage  to  Jacobs  that 
she  was  sealed  to  Joseph  Smith.  During  this 
seven  months  and  twenty  days  she  bore  two  sons 
to  Jacobs,  separated  from  him,  obtained  a  di- 
vorce (of  which  there  is  no  record),  received  in- 
struction from  Joseph  Smith  on  the  principle 
of  marriage  for  eternity,"  and  was  sealed  to 
him.  To  suggest  that  further  refutation  is  nec- 
essary would  be  an  insult  to  the  intelligence  of 
the  reader. 

In  the  case  of  Emily  D.  Partridge  Young,  we 
need  to  say  but  little.  In  her  testimony  in  the 
famous  Temple  Lot  Suit  she  testified  that  she 
was  married  to  Joseph  Smith.  At  one  time  in 
her  testimony  she  said  this  event  transpired  on 
March  11,  1843,  and  at  another  time  gave  the 
date  May  11, 1843.  (It  is  immaterial  which  date 
she  intended  to  give.) 

She  also  said: — 

I  was  not  married  to  Joseph  Smith  under  the 
revelation  on  sealing,  but  I  was  married  to  him 
under  the  revelation  on  plural  marriage. 

Under  cross-examination  she  was  asked: — 

Q,—  NOW,  I  would  like  for  you  to  explain  how 
you  were  married  to  Joseph  Smith  under  the 
plural  marriage  revelation  when  the  church  yo\& 
belong  to  claims  that  revelation  was  not  given 
until  July,  1843;  just  tell  how  you  could  be  mar- 
ried under  a  revelation  in  March  that  was  not 
given  until  July? 

A.— Well,  I  do  not  know  anything  about  that.— 
Plaintiff's  Abstract,  p.  364. 

This  certainly  throws  suspicion  upon  the  tes- 
timony of  this  woman. 

Elder  Orson  F.  Whitney,  in  an  article  en- 
titled, "An  Ensign  for  the  Nations,"  now 


4        WAS  JOSEPH  SMITH  A  POLYGAMIST  I 

running  in  the  Southern  Star,  published  at 
Chattanooga,  Tennessee,  in  order  to  cover  this 
point  states: — 

It  [plural  marriage]  was  a  key  to  the  highest 
heaven,  where  family  relationships  formed  on  earth 
according  to  divine  law,  were  perpetuated.  Hence 
the  revelation  on  plural  marriage,  committed  to 
writing:  July  12,  1843,  but  the  principle  of  which 
was  revealed  and  practiced  before  that  time  by  the 
Prophet  and  other  leaders  of  the  Church,  etc.— 
Southern  Star,  June  24,  1899. 

A  clever  dodge  is  this;  but  unfortunately  for 
Mr.  Whitney  they  published  this  so-called  reve- 
lation on  plural  marriage  in  their  Doctrine  and 
Covenants  as  early  as  1876,  under  the  following 
headlines: — 

Revelation  on  the  Eternity  of  the  Marriage 
Covenant,  including  Plurality  of  Wives.  Given 
through  Joseph,  the  Seer,  in  Nauvoo,  Hancock 
County,  Illinois,  July  12th,  1843. 
m  It  will  hardly  do  now  for  Mr.  Whitney  to  as- 
sign an  earlier  date  for  the  giving  of  this  reve- 
lation. It  only  throws  suspicion  upon  the 
whole  affair,  and  causes  thoughtful  men  who 
are  judges  of  ^  evidence  to  suspect  that  the  so- 
called  revelation  is  a  trumped  up  affair,  gotten 
up  by  men  already  in  the  practice  of  crime,  who 
connected  Joseph  Smith's  name  with  it  to  give 
*it  prestige  among  those  who  had  confidence  in 
his  teachings. 

In  rebuttal  we  offer: — 

First.  That  there  can  be  found  no  word  in 
favor  of  plural  marriage  in  church  publications 
issued  before  the  death  of  Joseph  Smith,  June 
27,  1844. 

Second.  That  there  is  not  nor  has  been  any 
progeny  of  Joseph  Smith  except  by  his  legal 
wife,  Emma  Hale,  whom  he  married  January  18, 
1827. 


WAS  JOSEPH  SMITH  A  POLYGAMISTI         5 

Third.  That  after  the  death  of  Joseph  Smith 
the  existence  of  polygamy  and  plural  marriage 
was  universally  denied,  even  by  Brigham 
Young  and  his  associates,  until  August  29,  1852. 

Fourth.  That  on  August  29,  1852,  the  pur- 
ported revelation  on  plural  marriage  was  made 
public,  for  the  first  time,  at  a  special  conference 
held  in  Salt  Lake  City,  Utah;  and  that  at  that 
time  Brigham  Young  declared: — 

Though  that  doctrine  has  not  been  practiced  by 
the  Elders,  this  people  have  believed  in  it  for  years. 

In  support  of  the  first  statement  given  above 
we  submit  the  following  passages  as  being  posi- 
tively opposed  to  the  plural  wife  system,  and 
Invite  the  presentation  of  any  authorized  state- 
ment supposed  to  favor  such  system: — 

Wherefore,  my  brethren,  hear  me,  and  hearken 
to  the  word  of  the  Lord:  For  there  shall  not  any 
man  among  you  have  save  it  be  one  wife:  and  con- 
cubines he  shall  have  none:  For  I,  the  Lord  God, 
delighteth  in  the  chastity  of  women.— Book  oi 
Mormon  (published  1830)  Jacob  2:  6. 

The  following  was  given  through  Joseph 
Smith,  February,  1831:— 

Thou  shalt  love  thy  wife  with  all  thy  heart,  and 
shall  cleave  unto  her  and  none  else;  and  he  that 
looketh  upon  a  woman  to  lust  after  her,  shall  deny 
the  faith,  and  shall  not  have  the  Spirit;  and  if  he 
repents  not,  he  shall  be  cast  out. — D.  C.  42:  7. 

The  following  was  given  in  March,  1831: — 
And  again,  I  say  unto  you,  that  whoso  for- 
biddeth  to  marry,  is  not  ordained  of  God,  for  mar- 
riage is  ordained  of  God  unto  man;  wherefore  it  is 
lawful  that  he  should  have  one  wife,  and  they 
twain  shall  be  one  flesh,  and  all  this  that  the  earth 
might  answer  the  end  of  its  creation;  and  that  it 
might  be  filled  with  the  measure  of  man,  according 
to  his  creation  before  the  world  was  made.— D.  C. 
49:3. 
On  August  17,  1835,  the  Doctrine  and  Cove- 


•        WAS  JOSEPH   SMITH  A  POLYGAMIST? 

nants  was  accepted  by  the  church  in  General 
Assembly;  first  by  each  of  the  quorums  sepa- 
rately, and  then  by  the  assembly  in  collective 
capacity.  An  article  on  marriage,  was  at 
that  time  by  unanimous  vote,  ordered  printed 
in  the  book,  as  the  following  will  show: — 

President  W.  W.  Phelps  then  read  an  article  on 
Marriage,  which  was  accepted  and  adopted,  and 
ordered  to  bo  printed  in  said  book,  by  a  unani- 
mous vote. — Minutes  of  General  Assembly,  D.  C. 
p.  330. 

That  article  on  marriage  contained  the  follow- 
ing ceremony: — 

Marriage  should  be  celebrated  with  prayer  and 
thanksgiving;  and  at  the  solemnization,  the  per- 
sons to  be  married,  standing  together,  the  man  on 
the  right,  and  the  woman  on  the  left,  shall  be  ad- 
dressed, by  the  person  officiating,  as  he  shall  be 
directed  by  the  Holy  Spirit;  and  if  there  be  no 
legal  objections,  he  shall  say,  calling  each  by  their 
names:  "You  both  mutually  agree  to  be  each  oth^ 
er's  companion,  husband  and  wife,  observing  the 
legal  rights  belonging  to  this  condition;  that  is, 
keeping  yourselves  wholly  for  each  other,  and 
from  all  others,  during  your  lives."  And  when 
they  have  answered  "Yes,"  he  shall  pronounce 
them  "husband  and  wife"  in  the  name  of  the  Lord 
Jesus  Christ,  and  by  virtue  of  the  laws  of  the  coun- 
try  and  authority  vested  in  him:  "May  God  add 
his  blessings  and  keep  you  to  fulfill  your  covenants 
from  henceforth  and  forever.  Amen." — D.  C.  Ill:  2. 

The  Times  and  Seasons,  published  at  Nauvoo, 
Illinois,  which  was  at  the  time  the  official 
church  organ,  in  its  issue  for  October  1,  1842, 
contains  the  following  certificates: — 

We  the  undersigned  members  of  the  church  of 
Jesus  Christ  of  Latter-Day  Saints  and  residents  of 
the  city  of  Nauvoo,  persons  of  families  do  hereby 
certify  and  declare  that  we  know  of  no  other  rule 
©r  system  of  marriage  than  the  one  published  fron? 
the  Book  of  Doctrine  and  Covenants,  and  we  give 


WAS  JOSEPH  SMITH  A  POLYGAMISTf        I 

this  certificate  to  show  that  Dr.  J.  C.  Bennett's  "se- 
cret wife  system"  is  a  creature  of  his  own  make  as 
we  know  of  no  such  society  in  this  place  nor  never  did. 
S.  Bennett,  N.  K.  Whitney, 

George  Miller,  Albert  Pettey, 

Alpheus  Cutler,  Elias  Higbee, 

Reynolds  Gaboon,  John  Taylor, 

Wilson  Law,  E.  Robinson, 

W.  Woodruff,  Aaron  Johnsoa. 

We  the  undersigned  members  Qf  the  ladies'  relief 
society,  and  married  females  do  certify  and  declare 
that  we  know  of  no  system  of  marriage  being  prac- 
tised in  the  church  of  Jesus  Christ  of  Latter  Day 
Saints  save  the  one  contained  in  the  Book  of  Doc- 
trine and  Covenants,  and  we  give  this  certificate  to 
the  public  to  show  that  J.  C.  Bennett's  "secret 
wife  system"  is  a  disclosure  of  his  own  make. 
Emma  Smith,  President, 
Elizabeth  Ann  Whitney,  Counsellor, 
.Sarah  M.  Cleveland,  Counsellor, 
Eliza  R.  Snow,  Secretary, 
Mary  C.  Miller,  Catharine  Pettey, 

Lois  Cutler,  Sarah  Higbee, 

Thirza  Gaboon,  Phebe  Woodruff, 

Ann  Hunter,  Leonora  Taylor, 

Jane  Law,  Sarah  Hillman, 

Sophia  R.  Marks,  Rosannah  Marks, 

Polly  Z.  Johnson,  Ang&line  Robinson, 

Abigail  Works. 

—Times  and  Seasons,  vol.  3,  pp.  939,  940. 

This  agrees  with  the  statement  made  by 
Elder  P.  P.  Pratt,  who  was  then  one  of  the 
Twelve  Apostles,  and  Editor  of  the  Millennial 
Star,  published  in  England.  In  the  August, 
1842,  issue  of  the  Star  he  states  editorially: — 

But,  for  the  information  of  those  who  may  be  as- 
sailed by  those  foolish  tales  about  the  two  wives, 
we  would  say  that  no  such  principle  ever  existed 
among  the  Latter  Day  Saints,  and  never  will;  this 
is  well  known  to  all  who  are  acquainted  with  our 
books  and  actions,  the  Book  of  Mormon,  Doctrine 


8         WAS  JOSEPH  SMITH  A  POLYGAMISTt 

and  Covenants;  and  also  all  our  periodicals  are  very 
strict  and  explicit  on  that  subject,  indeed  far  more 
so  than  the  Bible. — Millennial  Star,  vol.  3,  p.  74.^ 

The  utterances  of  Joseph  and  Hyrum  Smith 
up  to  a  few  months  before  their  deaths,  and 
so  far  as  we  have  authentic  information  of 
their  teaching,  were  positively  against  po- 
lygamy or  the  plural  wife  system.  The  Times 
and  Seasons  for  February  1,  1844,  contains  the 
following  notice: —  . 

•    NOTICE. 

As  we  have  lately  been  credibly  informed  that 
an  elder  of  the  Church  of  Jesus  Christ  of  Latter 
Day  Saints,  by  the  name  of  Hiram  Brown,  has  been 
preaching  polygamy,  and  other  false  and  corrupt 
doctrines,  in  the  county  of  Lapeer,  State  of  Michi- 
gan:— 

This  is  to  notify  him  and  the  church  in  general, 
that  he  has  been  cut  off  from  the  church  for  his 
iniquity;  and  he  is  further  notified  to  appear  at 
a  special  conference,  on  the  6th  of  April  next,  to 
make  answer  to  these  charges. 

JOSEPH  SMITH, 
HYRUM  SMITH, 
Presidents  of  said  Church. 
—Times  and  Seasons,  vol.  5,  p.  423. 
In  the  same  publication  for  March  15,  1844, 
is  found  a  letter  -from  Hyrum  Smith,  of  which 
the  following  is  an  extract: — 

NAUVOO,  March  15,  1844. 

To  the  Brethren  of  the  Church  of  Jesus  Christ  of 
Latter  Day  Saints,  livinq  on  China  Creek,  in  Hancock 
County,  Greeting:  —  Whereas  Brother  Richard 
Hewitt  has  called  on  me  to-day,  to  know  my  views 
concerning  some  doctrines  that  are  preached  in 
your  place,  and  states  to  me  that  some  of  your  eld- 
ers say,  that  a  man  having  a  certain  priesthood^  may 
have  as  many  wives  as  he  pleases,  and  that  doc- 
trine is  taught  here:  I  say  unto  you  that  that 
man  teaches  false  doctrine,  for  there  is  no  such 
doctrine  taught  here;  neither  is  there  any  such 
thing  practiced  here.  And  any  man  that  is  found 


WAS  JOSEPH  SMITH  A  POLYGAMIST  ?        9 

teaching  privately  or  publicly  any  such  doctrine, 
is  culpable,  and  will  stand  a  chance  to  be  brought 
before  the  High  Council,  and  lose  his  license  and 
membership  also:  therefore  he  had  better  beware 
what  he  is  about. — Times  and  Seasons,  vol.  5,  p.  474. 

The  Times  and  Seasons,  then  edited  by  John 
Taylor,  one  of  the  Twelve  Apostles,  stated 
editorially  in  its  issue  for  April  1,  1844: — 

If  any  man  writes  to  you,  or  preaches  to  you, 
doctrines  contrary  to  the  Bible,  the  Book  of  Mor- 
mon, or  the  Book  of  Doctrine  and  Covenants,  set 
him  down  as  an  impostor.  You  need  not  write  to 
us  to  know  what  you  are  to  do  with  such  men;  you 
have  the  authority  with  you.  Try  them  by  the 
principles  contained  in  the  acknowledged  word  of 
God;  if  they  preach,  or  teach,  or  practice  contrary 
to  that,  disfellowship  them;  cut  them  off  from 
among  you  as  useless  and  dangerous  branches,  and 
if  they  are  belonging  to  any  of  the  quorums  in  the 
church,  report  them  to  the  president  of  the  quorum 
to  which  they  belong;  and  if  you  cannot  find  that 
out,  if  they  are  members  of  an  official  standing, 
belonging  to  Nauvop,  report  them  to  us. 

Follow  after  purity,  virtue,  holiness,  Integrity, 
•godliness,  and  everything  that  has  a  tendency  to 
exalt  and  ennoble  the  human  mind;  and  shun  every 
man  who  teaches  any  other  principles. — Times  and 
Seasons,  vol.  5,  pp.  490,  491. 

On  our  second  proposition  extended  remarks 
are  unnecessary.  It  is  generally  conceded  that 
Joseph  Smith  had  no  issue  except  his  children 
by  Emma.  Should  there  be  any  who  dissent 
from  this  general  concession,  we  invite  them, 
as  we  have  often  done  before,  to  authenticate 
the  claim  by  bringing  forward  the  heir,  or  by 
other  competent  evidence. 

Mr.  Wilford  Woodruff,  then  President  of  the 
Utah  Church,  did  in  1892  concede  this  lack  of 
issue.  On  May  30,  1892,  Mr.  H.  Neidig  (not  a 
member  of  any  church),  of  Wampum,  Pennsyl- 
vania, wrote  Mr.  Woodruff  on  this  point,  and 


10       WAS  JOSEPH  SMITH  A  POLYGAMIST  ? 

Mr.  Woodruff,  through  his  secretary,  George 
Reynolds,  replied  as  follows: — 

The  facts  that  you  refer  to  are  almost  as  great  a 
mystery  to  us  as  they  are  to  you;  but  the  reason 
generally  assigned  by  the  wives  themselves  is,  that 
owing  to  the  peculiar  circumstances  by  which  they 
were  surrounded,  they  were  so  nervous  and  in  such 
constant  fear  that  they  did  not  conceive. 

Comment  is  unnecessary,  but  we  are  not  sur- 
prised at  the  effect  of  this  on  Mr.  Neidig.  He 
writes,  under  date  of  June  20,  1892,  as  follows: — 

The  answer  came  June  7th,  and  amazed  me.  I 
am  not  yet  fully  recovered  from  my  astonishment 
that  a  grave  man,  on  a  grave  subject,  on  a  question 
which  is  bound  to  be  a  hinge  on  which  must  turn 
an  important  point  of  Mormon  history,  should  thus 
seek  to  account  for  what  he  concedes  to  be  a  fact. 

The  inquiry  of  Mr.  George  F.  Edmunds,  of 
Carthage,  Illinois,  when  considering  this  theory 
of  Mr.  Woodruff's,  is  pertinent.  He  says: — 

WHAT!  A  MATURE  MARRIED  WOMAN,  MARRIED 

BY  THE  -SANCTION  OP  ALMIGHTY  GOD,  in  fear? 
IN  PEAR  OF  WHAT? 

When  we  remember  that  this  revelation  was 
purportedly  given  for  the  purpose  of  raising  up 
a  righteous  seed,  and  then  consider  the  claim 
that  all  these  women  (twenty-seven  or  more, 
according  to  the  allegations)  became  so  fright- 
ened as  to  prevent  the  purpose  of  the  institu- 
tion being  realized,  we  have  reached  the  climax 
of  absurdity. 

If  the  reader  will  here  pardon  the  digression 
we  wish  to  kindly  remind  him  that  the  claim 
that  polygamy  was  or  is  essential  to  the  raising 
up  of  a  righteous  seed  is  opposed -to  the  revealed 
will  of  God,  as  the  following  passages  will  show: — 

And  did  not  he  make  one?  Yet  had  he  the  resi- 
due of  the  Spirit.  And  wherefore  one?  That  he 
might  seek  a  godly  seed.  Therefore  take  heed  to 


WAS  JOSEPH  SMITH  A  POLYGAMIST  t       11 

your  spirit,  and  let  none  deal  treacherously  against 
the  wife  of  his  youth.— Malachi  2: 15. 
The  teaching  of  the  Book  of  Mormon  is  clean- 
Behold,  David  and  Solomon  truly  had  many 
wives  and  concubines,  which  thing  was  abominable 
before  me,  saith  the  Lord,  wherefore,  thus  saith 
the  Lord,  I  have  led  this  people  forth  out  of  the 
land  of  Jerusalem,  by  the  power  of  mine  arm,  that 
I  might  raise  up  unto  me  a  righteous  branch  from 
the  fruit  of  the  loins  of  Joseph.  Wherefore,  I,  the 
Lord  God,  will  not  suffer  that  this  people  shall  do 
like  unto  them  of  old.  Wherefore,  my  brethren, 
hear  me,  and  hearken  to  the  word  of  the  Lord: 
For  there  shall  not  any  man  among  you  have  save 
it  be  one  wife:  and  concubines  he  shall  have  none: 
For  I,  the  Lord  God,  delighteth  in  the  chastity  of 
women.  And  whoredoms  are  an  abomination  be- 
fore me:  thus  saith  the  Lord  of  hosts. —Jacob  2: 6. 
In  January,  1831,  the  Lord  instructed  his 
servants  to  go  to  Ohio,  and  promised  to  reveal 
unto  them  a  law  there,  one  of  the  purposes  of 
which  was  to  gather  "a  righteous  people,  with- 
out spot  and  blameless."  The  language  of  the 
revelation  is  as  follows: — 

And  that  ye  might  escape  the  power  of  the 
enemy,  and  be  gathered  unto  me  a  righteous  people, 
without  spot  and  blameless:  wherefore,  for  this 
cause  I  gave  unto  you  the  commandment,  that  ye 
should  go  to  the  Ohio;  and  there  I  will  give  unto 
you  my  law;  and  there  you  shall  be  endowed  with 
power  from  on  high,  and  from  thence,  whomsoever 
I  will,  shall  go  forth  among  all  nations,  and  it  shall 
be  told  them  what  they  shall  do;  for  I  have  a  great 
work  laid  up  in  store,  for  Israel  shall  be  saved,  and 
I  will  lead  them  whithersoever  I  will,  and  no  power 
shall  stay  my  hand.— D.  C.  38:  7. 

They  went  to  Ohio,  according  to  direction, 
and  there  the  Lord  fulfilled  his  promise,  and  the 
law  was  given  containing  the  following: — 

Thou  shalt  love  thy  wife  with  all  thy  heart,  and 
shall  cleave  unto  her  and  none  else;  and  he  that 


12       WAS  JOSEPH  SMITH  A  POLYGAMISTT 

looketh  upon  a  woman  to  lust  after  her,  shall  deny 
the  faith,  and  shall  not  have  the  Spirit:  and  if  he 
repents  not,  he  shall  be  cast  out.— D.  C.  42:  7. 

This,  then,  was  one  among  the  many  means 
that  God  ordained  to  gather  "a  righteous  peo- 
ple, without  spot  and  blameless;"  and  this  is 
made  emphatic  in  each  of  the  three  records. 
Can  we  then  doubt  what  his  will  is  concerning 
the  union  of  the  sexes? 

Not  only  does  the  above  indicate  what  the 
will  of  God  is  concerning  marriage,  and  that  the 
effect  would  be  righteousness;  but  it  indicates 
that  by  obedience  to  this  law  the  church  would 
.  "escape  the  power  of  the  enemy."  Then  those 
who  depart  from  this  law  must  fall  under  "the 
power  of  the  enemy."  There  is  no  escape  from 
this  conclusion. 

In  support  of  our  third  proposition  we  present 
the  following: — 

In  Times  and  Seasons  for  November  15,  1844, 
appears  a  communication  signed  "An  Old  Man 
of  Israel,"  from  which  we  quote: — 

Woe  to  the  man  or  men  who  will  thus  willfully 
lie  to  injure  an  innocent  people!  The  law  of  the 
land  and  the  rules  of  the  church  do  not  allow  one 
man  to  have  more  than  one  wife  alive  at  once,  but 
if  any  man's  wife  die,  he  has  a  right  to  marry  an- 
other, and  to  be  sealed  to  both  for  eternity;  to  the 
living  and  the  dead  I  there  is  no  law  of  God  or  man 
against  it!  This  is  all  the  spiritual  wife  system 
that  ever  was  tolerated  in  the  church,  and  they 
know  it.— Times  and  Seasons,  vol.  5,  p.  715. 

This  alone  might  not  be  considered  authentic, 
but  it  received  the  indorsement  of  the  Editor, 
Apostle  John  Taylor,  who  was  afterwards 
President  of  the  church  in  Utah.  He  wrote:— 

For  the  communication  of  an  "old  man  of  Israel," 
and  the  letter  of  Elder  Addison  Pratt  from  the 
islands  of  the  Pacific  Ocean,  we  bespeak  a  hearty 


WAS  JOSEPH  SMITH  A  POLYGAMIST?       18 

welcome.  They  are  genuine. — Times  and  Seasons, 
vol.  5,  p.  711. 

This  same  Apostle  Taylor,  in  a  discussion 
held  at  Boulogne-sur-Mer,  France,  in  July, 
1850,  resented  the  charge  of  polygamy  in  the 
following  vigorous  language: — 

We  are  accused  here  of  polygamy,  and  actions 
the  most  indelicate,  obscene,  and  disgusting,  such 
that  none  hut  a  corrupt  and  depraved  heart  could 
have  contrived.  These  things  are  too  outrageous 
to  admit  of  belief;  therefore  leaving  the  sisters  of 
the  " White  Veil,"  the  "Black  Veil,"  and  all  the 
other  veils,  with  those  gentlemen  to  dispose  of,  to- 
gether with  their  authors,  as  they  think  best,  I 
shall  content  myself  by  reading  our  views  of  chas- 
tity and  marriage,  from  a  work  published  by  us, 
containing  some  of  the  articles  of  our  faith. 

He  then  read  the  article  on  marriage  from 
Doctrine  and  Covenants,  from  which  we  have 
quoted  the  marriage  ceremony.  (See  public 
discussion  between  John  Taylor  and  0.  W. 
Cleeve,  et  al.,  p.  8.) 

In  1851  Elder  William  Smith,  the  only  surviv- 
ing brother  of  Joseph  Smith,  was  industriously 
promulgating  his  charge  that  Brigham  Young, 
et  al.,  were  practicing  polygamy.  Col.  Thomas 
L.  Kane  wrote  to  President  Fillmore  in  defense 
of  Brigham  Young  and  the  Mormons,  seeking 
to  vindicate  Young  and  accuse  William  Smith 
of  slander.  He  wrote: — 

The  remaining  charge  connects  itself  with  that 
unmixed  outrage,  the  spiritual  wife  story,  which 
was  fastened  on  the  Mormons  by  a  poor  ribald 
scamp,  whom,  though  the  sole  surviving  brother 
and  representative  of  their  Jo.  Smith,  they  were 
literally  forced  to  excommunicate  for  his  licen- 
tiousness, and  who  thereupon  revenged  himself  by 
editing  confessions  and  disclosures  of  savor  to 
please  the  public  that  peruses  works  in  yellow 
paper  covers. — Millennial  Star,  vol.  13,  p.  344. 


14       WAS  JOSEPH  SMITH  A  POLYGAMIST? 

It  may  be  claimed  that  the  Mormons  were 
not  responsible  for  what  Colonel  Kane  wrote; 
but  they  were  willing  to  accept  the  benefit  of 
the  denial,  and  published  it,  without  explana- 
tion, in  one  of  their  church  papers;  viz.,  the 
Millennial  Star,  under  the  headlines,  "Charges 
against  the  Governor  of  Utah  [Brigham  Young] 
Disproved  and  Withdrawn."  This  was  Novem- 
ber 15,  1851,  about  nine  months  before  they 
publicly  avowed  polygamy. 

In  conclusion  upon  this  point  we  quote  the 
testimony  of  William  Marks,  who  was  Presi- 
dent of  the  Nauvoo  Stake  at  the  time  of  Joseph 
Smith's  death:— 

A  few  days  after  this  occurrence  I  met  with 
Brother  Joseph.  He  said  that  he  wanted  to  con- 
verse with  me  on  the  affairs  of  the  church,  and  we 
retired  by  ourselves.  I  will  give  his  words  ver- 
batim, for  they  are  indelibly  stamped  upon  my 
mind.  He  said  he  had  desired  for  a  long  time  to 
have  a  talk  with  me  on  the  subject  of  polygamy. 
He  said  it  eventually  would  prove  the  overthrow  of 
the  church,  and  we  should  soon  be  obliged  to  leave 
the  United  States,  unless  it  could  be  speedily  put 
down.  He  was  satisfied  that  it  was  a  cursed  doc- 
trine,  and  that  there  must  be  every  exertion  made 
to  put  it  down.  He  said  that  he  would  go  before 
the  congregation  and  proclaim  against  it,  and  I 
must  go  into  the  High  Council,  and  he  would  pre- 
fer charges  against  those  in  transgression,  and  I 
must  sever  them  from  the  church  unless  they  made 
ample  satisfaction.  There  was  much  more  said, 
but  this  was  the  substance.  The  mob  commenced 
to  gather  about  Carthage  in  a  few  days  after, 
therefore  there  was  nothing  done  concerning  it. 

After  the  Prophet's  death,  I  made  mention  of 
this  conversation  to  several,  hoping  and  believing 
that  it  would  have  a  good  effect;  but  to  my  great  dis- 
appointment, it  was  soon  rumored  about  that  Brother 
Marks  was  about  to  apostatize,  and  that  ail  that  he 
said  about  the  conversation  with  the  Prophet  waa 


WAS   JOSEPH   SMITH  A  POLYGAM1ST  I       15 

a  tissue  of  lies.  .  .  . — Saints'  Herald,  vol.  1,  pp.  22,23. 

It  is  not  difficult  now  to  locate  some  of  the 
transgressors  referred  to,  as  two  at  least  of  the 
men  who  have  since  been  prominent  in  the  Utah 
Church  have  confessed  to  having  known  about 
this  system  before  Joseph  Smith  mentioned  it: — 

In  a  speech  of  Brigham  Young,  of  June  21st,  1874, 
(See  Deseret  News  of  July  1  of  that  year),  is  found 
the  following  statement  relative  to  the  origin  of 
the  doctrine  of  polygamy:— 

While  we  were  in  England  (in  1839  and  40),  I 
think,  the  Lord  manifested  to  me  by  vision  and  his 
Spirit  things  that  I  did  not  then  understand;  I 
never  opened  my  mouth  to  anyone  concerning 
them,  until  I  returned  to  Nauvoo;  Joseph  had 
never  mentioned  this;  there  had  never  been  a 
thought  of  it  in  tlgfe  church  that  I  ever  knew  any- 
thing about  at  that  time;  but  I  had  this  for  myself, 
and  I  kept  it  to  myself. — The  Messenger,  vol.  1,  p.  29. 

Now  comes  Lorenzo  Snow,  present  President 
of  the  church  in  Utah,  and  in  a  sermon  deliv- 
ered at  St.  George,  Utah,  May  8,  1899,  he  says: — 

There  is  no  man  that  lives  that  had  a  more  per- 
fect knowledge  of  the  principle  of  plural  marriage, 
its  holiness  and  divinity,  than  what  I  had.  It  was 
revealed  to  me  before  the  Prophet  Joseph  Smith 
explained  it  to  me.  I  had  been  on  a  mission  to 
England  between  two  and  three  years,  and  before  I 
left  England  I  was  perfectly  satisfied  in  regard  to 
something  connected  with  plural  marriage. — Des- 
eret  Semi-  Weekly  News,  June  6,  1899. 

In  support  of  our  fourth  proposition  but  little 
is  necessary. 

It  has  frequently  been  admitted,  and  never  to 
our  knowledge  denied,  that  the  revelation  in 
question  was  not  made  public  until  August  29, 
1852.  Therefore  to  quote  largely  upon  this 
point  is  unnecessary.  However,  we  will  give 
the  latest  statement  coming  under  our  notice. 
Elder  O.  F.  Whitney,  in  a  "Sketch  of  Utah  and 


16       WAS  JOSEPH  SMITH  A  POLYGAMIST  ? 

Mormonism,"  published  in  a  "Souvenir  of 
Utah,"  issued  in  1899  from  the  press  of  George 
Q.  Cannon  and  Sons  Company,  for  E.  L.  and  T. 
L.  Talbot,  says: — 

As  early  as  1862  Congress  had  legislated  upon  the 
subject  of  polygamy,  the  plural  marriage  system 
of  the  Saints,  practiced  by  Joseph  Smith  and  other 
Mormon  leaders  at  Nauvoo,  but  never  publicly 
promulged  by  the  church  until  1852. 

The  statement  of  Brigham  Young  made  on 
August  29,  1852,  that  the  doctrine  had  not  been 
practiced  by  the  elders,  is  found  on  page  31  of 
Supplement  to  volume  15  of  Millennial  Star.  It 
may  be  that  this  statement  of  Mr.  Young*  s  is 
false.  We  would  not  undertake  to  defend  it. 
But  his  friends  in  Utah  cajjyiot  afford  to  im- 
peach him,  for  he  is  the  principal  witness  upon 
whom  they  rely  to  prove  the  genuineness  of  the 
document  introduced  as  a  revelation  on  August 
29,  1852.  They  may  take  either  horn  of  the 
dilemma  they  choose.  Tf  they  reject  him  as  a 
witness,  then  they  should  dismiss  their  case 
which  rests  upon  his  testimony  in  favor  of  the 
genuineness  of  the  plural  marriage  revelation. 
If  they  retain  him  as  their  witness,  they  are 
logically  and  legally  bound  by  his  testimony,* 
and  we  shall  insist  that  they  accept  his  state- 
ment that  the  elders  (which  would  include 
Joseph  Smith)  had  not  practiced  polygamy  or 
plural  marriage  before  August  29,  1852.  We 
await  their  motion.  Shall  the  testimony  of  Brig- 
ham  Young  be  stricken  put  or  not?  What  say  you? 

An  exhaustive  treatise  upon  the  issues  would 
be  too  voluminous,  nor  is  it  necessary.  We 
present  this  as  a  sufficient  refutation  of  the 
allegations  brought  by  our  opponents,  and 
await  with  patience  the  verdict  of  the  jury — 
the  public. 

LAMONI,  Iowa,  July  15. 1899. 


